Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov London Mayoral poll has Sadiq with 7% lead

SystemSystem Posts: 12,678
edited March 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov London Mayoral poll has Sadiq with 7% lead

New YouGov London Mayoral poll had Sadiq Khan maintaining 7% lead pic.twitter.com/XBx4DwFphO

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    Yes we Khan
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    If those DKs break decisively for Goldsmith, he might have a chance, but I'm not expecting him to be Mayor
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    A very sad day for london, but don;t see what can stop Khan now.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    Here's the YouGov write up

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/03/14/sadiq-khan-lead-london-mayoral-race/
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Sam Wang: Trump needs to lose Ohio, to secure the nomination...
    http://prospect.org/article/losing-ohio-improves-trump’s-chances-win-nomination
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,187
    I'm counting down the seconds to the inevitable Star Trek 'quote' by Sunil..
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited March 2016
    It's hard to find any good reason for thinking Zac might bring this one off, unless perhaps the Evening Standard spends the next few weeks laying into Sadiq on the security and terrorism issue. If anything, the odds on Sadiq (currently 1.42-1.43 on Betfair) look too long.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,187
    taffys said:

    A very sad day for london, but don;t see what can stop Khan now.

    It Khan be done.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,367
    So Galloway supporters only need to vote about 35 times each (given the larger pool of votes)? Nailed on.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    Khan is going to walk this despite all his dodgy connections.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    No EU polls for more than a week, and just 4 during March so far. What's going on?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum#2016
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    I think YouGov are missing the Winston McKenzie surge, given his pro Heathrow expansion credentials.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    AndyJS said:

    No EU polls for more than a week, and just 4 during March so far. What's going on?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum#2016

    We should be getting two phone polls on it this week, plus the ICM online tracker.

    Since the polling disaster of last year not everyone is willing to pay for polling, especially given the divergence between the phone and online polls.

    We've had a Scottish EU ref poll in the last week though.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,367
    Not sure I understand why, "this is reasonably good news for Zac" unless he really wants to remain a somewhat part time MP who can indulge various interests with less hassle.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    DavidL said:

    Not sure I understand why, "this is reasonably good news for Zac" unless he really wants to remain a somewhat part time MP who can indulge various interests with less hassle.

    Typo by Mike.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,588
    I'd say a lot of those don't knows do know. Who they'll vote for though is anyone's guess.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    If those DKs break decisively for Goldsmith, he might have a chance, but I'm not expecting him to be Mayor

    Zac's 33/1 supporters will rely on DKs, differential turnout, and Zac eventually saying something interesting that is not about airports.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It's hard to find any good reason for thinking Zac might bring this one off, unless perhaps the Evening Standard spends the next few weeks laying into Sadiq on the security and terrorism issue. If anything, the odds on Sadiq (currently 1.42-1.43 on Betfair) look too long.

    I agree. The Conservative campaign is astute in that attacking Khan's fitness for office is probably their best chance. I can't see that it will be enough though.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    If those DKs break decisively for Goldsmith, he might have a chance, but I'm not expecting him to be Mayor

    Zac's 33/1 supporters will rely on DKs, differential turnout, and Zac eventually saying something interesting that is not about airports.
    He has said something interesting about airports?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    I’m gonna back Zac and crack.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    If those DKs break decisively for Goldsmith, he might have a chance, but I'm not expecting him to be Mayor

    Zac's 33/1 supporters will rely on DKs, differential turnout, and Zac eventually saying something interesting that is not about airports.
    Or will have backed Khan at decent odds against too.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    Look at that Lib Dem surge. Up 50% in just two months.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Khan is going to walk this despite all his dodgy connections.

    What would damage Khan is if he said something similar to what McDonnell and Corbyn have in the past about terrorism and terrorists.

    You can't portray him as a risk to national security in the way you can with the gruesome twosome
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @theobertram: I've been bullish about Sadiq's chances but just starting to get nervous that some opposition may not voice itself in focus groups & polls.

    @theobertram: If you are influenced by this kind of story, maybe you keep it to yourself https://t.co/ZkUBzB5Rh4
  • isamisam Posts: 42,578
    Let's just hope the polling on this is as bad as it was at the GE
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    edited March 2016
    I am not sure Chris Evans claim of long lens gave a false impression of how close those doughnuts were to the Cenotaph is going to hold up....oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3491341/Top-Gear-host-Chris-Evans-apologises-unreservedly-Matt-LeBlanc-s-disrespectful-wheelspins-Cenotaph-criticism-Army-veterans-says-him.html
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @Pidge: @theobertram Did a phone bank for Sadiq, called c.40 people. Terror mentioned 3 times. Don't know if others have same experiences. Worrying.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I take it that we don't yet know how second preferences would be distributed. But I would have thought that would stretch Sadiq Khan's lead further.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    isam said:

    Let's just hope the polling on this is as bad as it was at the GE

    Well, it could be. And we haven't had that much of it. And we may be engaging in groupthink that Zac is a lacklustre candidate who won't come near overturning London's Labour preference.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,781
    The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

    IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    NickPalmer said:


    IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb.

    As if it was just that...

  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    The rubber marks are very clear, stupid producer decision - now disowned.
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    I am not sure Chris Evans claim of long lens gave a false impression of how close those doughnuts were to the Cenotaph is going to hold up....oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3491341/Top-Gear-host-Chris-Evans-apologises-unreservedly-Matt-LeBlanc-s-disrespectful-wheelspins-Cenotaph-criticism-Army-veterans-says-him.html

  • NorfolkTilIDieNorfolkTilIDie Posts: 1,268
    NickPalmer said:

    The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

    IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.

    I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Romney to campaign for Kasich:

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/romney-campaigns-for-kasich-endorses-not-trump.html
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    The other point to make is that Sadiq looks a hell of a lot less dodgy than Ken looked in 2012, and Zac, although quite a good candidate, doesn't have the magic appeal of Boris. Yet Boris beat Ken only very narrowly last time; it's hard to see how Zac can do as well this time.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    edited March 2016
    Plato_Says said:

    The rubber marks are very clear, stupid producer decision - now disowned.

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    I am not sure Chris Evans claim of long lens gave a false impression of how close those doughnuts were to the Cenotaph is going to hold up....oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3491341/Top-Gear-host-Chris-Evans-apologises-unreservedly-Matt-LeBlanc-s-disrespectful-wheelspins-Cenotaph-criticism-Army-veterans-says-him.html

    Seems a bizarre decision...London ain't exactly short of landmarks to get Kenny from the Block to do his stuff around. Maybe they remember Charlie Gilmour swinging from it and thought well that seems like a good idea.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Trump in Hickory, NC shortly
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf-i5_qFpw
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited March 2016
    Plato_Says said:

    The rubber marks are very clear, stupid producer decision - now disowned.

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    I am not sure Chris Evans claim of long lens gave a false impression of how close those doughnuts were to the Cenotaph is going to hold up....oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3491341/Top-Gear-host-Chris-Evans-apologises-unreservedly-Matt-LeBlanc-s-disrespectful-wheelspins-Cenotaph-criticism-Army-veterans-says-him.html

    As if. Nothing's happening on that show without Evans knowing about it.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    edited March 2016
    AlastairMeeks said:

    I take it that we don't yet know how second preferences would be distributed. But I would have thought that would stretch Sadiq Khan's lead further.

    34/42 on the final ballot in favour of Khan in a forced question.

    Repercentaged to remove DKs, it gives Khan a 10% lead. Khan 55% Zac 45%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/em8yhyeskh/LondonMayoralResults_March16_W.pdf
  • NorfolkTilIDieNorfolkTilIDie Posts: 1,268
    This is great.

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-trump-supporters-were-doing-before-trump/
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,361
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

    Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Indigo said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Scott_P said:

    @GuardianAnushka: Tom Watson gets urgent question on Queen and Gove this afternoon. He's not letting go

    Nonce Finder General has found a new cause...he's never wrong this lad.
    Its a bit odd. The NFG tables the question. The PM stands up, says "No" and sits down again. then where does he go, it's not like there is going to be a surfeit of solid evidence about who said or heard what at the Privy Council.
    Will it be Dave replying? If it is a Privy Counsel matter, then Chris Grayling will be replying as Lord President of the Privy Counsel?
    Could be. So it will be Grayling standing up, saying "No" and sitting down again. Without any evidence this isn't going anywhere, and the privy council is almost by definition the sort of place where that sort of evidence is going to be hard to come by. Its a bit of mischievous arm waving to try and draw attention from Labour's embarrassment (ie their leader)
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    I take it that we don't yet know how second preferences would be distributed. But I would have thought that would stretch Sadiq Khan's lead further.

    34/42 on the final ballot in favour of Khan in a forced question.

    Repercentaged to remove DKs, it gives Khan a 10% lead. Khan 55% Zac 45%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/em8yhyeskh/LondonMayoralResults_March16_W.pdf
    The polls are looking remarkably consistent with each other on this.

    This doesn't particularly surprise me. With neither candidate looking particularly memorable, the public are presumably largely defaulting to voting along normal party lines. Since London is trending towards Labour, that means that Labour should win without breaking sweat.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Great reason for voting REMAIN.......

    It'll p*ss off the French:

    http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2016/03/12/une-majorite-de-francais-souhaite-un-referendum-sur-le-frexit-la-sortie-de-la-france-de-l-ue_4881768_3214.html
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    david_herdson said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

    Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.
    Please not the 23rd of June.

    I just know my next stint as Guest Editor covers the EURef bar the last four days will be the least stressful stint ever.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    The fake wedding bit made me cringe. It's just tacky advertising stunt stuff.
    watford30 said:

    Plato_Says said:

    The rubber marks are very clear, stupid producer decision - now disowned.

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    I am not sure Chris Evans claim of long lens gave a false impression of how close those doughnuts were to the Cenotaph is going to hold up....oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3491341/Top-Gear-host-Chris-Evans-apologises-unreservedly-Matt-LeBlanc-s-disrespectful-wheelspins-Cenotaph-criticism-Army-veterans-says-him.html

    As if. Nothing's happening on that show without Evans knowing about it.
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    'oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear'

    Funny how these things work out, isn't it?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3480238/Aide-Labour-s-mayoral-candidate-Sadiq-Khan-quits-claimed-Lee-Rigby-killing-faked-boasting-hired-hitman.html

    Khan attempting to appeal to the Ted Cruz demographic maybe ?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 26,051
    Who voted AfD ? Young, male, disenchanted seems to be the answer.

    Charts on this are self explanatory. Biggest segment is Nichtwaehler ( non-voters last time ). Andere also quite high

    In contrast to earlier reports on Sachsen Anhalt this analysis suggests the CDU shed most votes to AfD in absolute terms with Linke and SPD still being hard hit.

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/afd-waehler-jung-maennlich-und-enttaeuscht-14123702.html#/elections
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    AlastairMeeks said:

    I take it that we don't yet know how second preferences would be distributed. But I would have thought that would stretch Sadiq Khan's lead further.

    Second choices could be crucial.

    It would seem that Cameron and Osborne are doing everything they can to offend Lib Dem voters.

    Is this intentional, because they can´t stand Goldsmith and see him as a threat to Osborne´s ambitions? Or just part of their ususal arrogance?

    So I suspect Mr Meeks might be right.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    NorfolkTilIDie said:

    This is great.

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-trump-supporters-were-doing-before-trump/

    Interesting to see 538 making the explicit Trump:UKIP comparison. How do people think the General Election would have gone [in England & Wales] if the only two candidates were Farage & Miliband?
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    david_herdson said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

    Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.
    Please not the 23rd of June.

    I just know my next stint as Guest Editor covers the EURef bar the last four days will be the least stressful stint ever.
    I thought the EC guidance warned against holding other elections on the same day as referendums? Though I don't know if that applies to by-elections.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    Scott_P said:

    @Pidge: @theobertram Did a phone bank for Sadiq, called c.40 people. Terror mentioned 3 times. Don't know if others have same experiences. Worrying.

    I've done a fair bit of doorstep canvassing and terrorism has not been mentioned once.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    AlastairMeeks said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    I take it that we don't yet know how second preferences would be distributed. But I would have thought that would stretch Sadiq Khan's lead further.

    34/42 on the final ballot in favour of Khan in a forced question.

    Repercentaged to remove DKs, it gives Khan a 10% lead. Khan 55% Zac 45%

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/em8yhyeskh/LondonMayoralResults_March16_W.pdf
    The polls are looking remarkably consistent with each other on this.

    This doesn't particularly surprise me. With neither candidate looking particularly memorable, the public are presumably largely defaulting to voting along normal party lines. Since London is trending towards Labour, that means that Labour should win without breaking sweat.
    Indeed.

    Just for fun, I have suggested to a pollster they ask in their next London Mayoral poll

    'If the candidates were Sadiq Khan and Boris Johnson, who would you vote for?'

    If Khan wins that, then Zac stands no chance.

    Hopefully we'll see the results in the next month.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Which wards are you in?
    anothernick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @Pidge: @theobertram Did a phone bank for Sadiq, called c.40 people. Terror mentioned 3 times. Don't know if others have same experiences. Worrying.

    I've done a fair bit of doorstep canvassing and terrorism has not been mentioned once.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Persuasive stuff from Matt Ridley on mercantilism vs free trade http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4712369.ece
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    anothernick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @Pidge: @theobertram Did a phone bank for Sadiq, called c.40 people. Terror mentioned 3 times. Don't know if others have same experiences. Worrying.

    I've done a fair bit of doorstep canvassing and terrorism has not been mentioned once.
    The Project Fear stuff about Khan isn't working then?
  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    CarlottaVance said:

    Great reason for voting REMAIN.......

    It'll p*ss off the French:

    http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2016/03/12/une-majorite-de-francais-souhaite-un-referendum-sur-le-frexit-la-sortie-de-la-france-de-l-ue_4881768_3214.html

    So contrary to previous received wisdom we can piss off the French more effectively by voting Remain so presemably that explains why Jeremy Clarkson is now a federalist (or a fake).
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    Tissue_Price said:

    NorfolkTilIDie said:

    This is great.

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-trump-supporters-were-doing-before-trump/

    Interesting to see 538 making the explicit Trump:UKIP comparison. How do people think the General Election would have gone [in England & Wales] if the only two candidates were Farage & Miliband?
    Is Hillary Clinton the Democrat's very own Ed Miliband ?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,361
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    david_herdson said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

    Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.
    Please not the 23rd of June.

    I just know my next stint as Guest Editor covers the EURef bar the last four days will be the least stressful stint ever.
    It is the obvious day though, isn't it?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    NickPalmer said:


    IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb.

    As if it was just that...

    I think this may be one of @NickPalmer's examples of telling the truth, but not *all* the truth
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    CarlottaVance said:

    Great reason for voting REMAIN.......

    It'll p*ss off the French:

    http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2016/03/12/une-majorite-de-francais-souhaite-un-referendum-sur-le-frexit-la-sortie-de-la-france-de-l-ue_4881768_3214.html

    Never mind the politics, the word 'Le Frexit' must be causing apoplexies at L'Académie française.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    New lunchtime anecdote.

    I dropped into our local wine shop and bought a bottle of Rioja called Mayor de Ondarre. The person selling it to me latched onto the first word in the name and started raving about Boris, said that he was a wonderful mayor (we are 100 miles from London) and very intelligent man.

    So, amongst people who have sold me wine this week:

    Leave 1
    Remain 0
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited March 2016
    I think Tooting would probably be a Tory gain in a by-election, so from that point of view losing the mayoral election wouldn't be entirely negative for the Conservatives.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Great reason for voting REMAIN.......

    It'll p*ss off the French:

    http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2016/03/12/une-majorite-de-francais-souhaite-un-referendum-sur-le-frexit-la-sortie-de-la-france-de-l-ue_4881768_3214.html

    Never mind the politics, the word 'Le Frexit' must be causing apoplexies at L'Académie française.
    "Brexit" is bad enough in English. Proposed new Leave conspiracy theory: the establishment (BBC?) are forcing this name on you to make it sound alien and offputting. What's wrong with Brindependence or Ukfreedom?
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Wanderer said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Great reason for voting REMAIN.......

    It'll p*ss off the French:

    http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2016/03/12/une-majorite-de-francais-souhaite-un-referendum-sur-le-frexit-la-sortie-de-la-france-de-l-ue_4881768_3214.html

    Never mind the politics, the word 'Le Frexit' must be causing apoplexies at L'Académie française.
    "Brexit" is bad enough in English. Proposed new Leave conspiracy theory: the establishment (BBC?) are forcing this name on you to make it sound alien and offputting. What's wrong with Brindependence or Ukfreedom?
    Or Ukoff?

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    edited March 2016
    http://order-order.com/2016/03/14/sadiqs-handshakes-with-q/

    Friend, not a friend, well not really a friend, well kinda of not really, yes, but no, but yeah, but no..

    I am interested in the claims at the end of the video that Khan wrote a foreground to a dodgy report, where he claims he had known him for 15 years and was a supporter.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,781
    NorfolkTilIDie said:



    I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

    I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

    But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    david_herdson said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    david_herdson said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

    Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.
    Please not the 23rd of June.

    I just know my next stint as Guest Editor covers the EURef bar the last four days will be the least stressful stint ever.
    It is the obvious day though, isn't it?
    It is.

    Perhaps Sadiq Khan will follow my advice and remain an MP if he becomes Mayor.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    edited March 2016
    NickPalmer said:

    NorfolkTilIDie said:



    I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

    I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

    But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.
    Of course his speech writer didn't just make these claims prior to joining Khan's team, he made them during as well....so no, not just vetting, but also at best totally clueless that somebody who writes his speeches spends his days making totally inappropriate remarks on social media. But then Khan also follows extremists on social media, but is clueless about that as well. Oh sorry that is like following the Daily Mail twitter feed when you are a leftie for "research".

    Then we have the case of the member of the dodgy mayors team who he has hired. Again poor vetting?

    So at best Khan is a totally clueless fool who lets very dodgy people associate themselves with him and he has welcomed some of them into his inner circle.

    I wonder what the reaction would be if Zac had a load of BNP types anywhere near his campaign?
  • isamisam Posts: 42,578
    edited March 2016
    NickPalmer said:

    NorfolkTilIDie said:



    I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

    I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

    But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.
    Nice, reasonable, mild mannered Nick casually equating supporting UKIP and Islamic Extremism
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @ian_a_jones: Poll updates for @PA: in Scotland, we're now forecasting Labour to come third, behind the SNP & the Tories. (1/2) https://t.co/m8uxecdgAO
  • NorfolkTilIDieNorfolkTilIDie Posts: 1,268
    NickPalmer said:

    NorfolkTilIDie said:



    I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

    I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

    But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.
    Think thats mostly right. Khan's support for gay marriage removes all doubt in my mind that he is influenced by hardline religion. Although I would prefer he calls it out more. I think that's Labour's problem. Not that they are extreme, but they go softly softly on religious conservatism so as not to upset voters. We really shouldn't be supporting events with segregated audiences.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    NickPalmer said:

    NorfolkTilIDie said:



    I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

    I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

    But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.
    This is an example of how London (and some other large cities) are now very different from rural and suburban England. I doubt if any of those here insinuating that SK supports terrorism have votes in the Mayoral election.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    My referendum anecdotes (from a family wedding). No, I didn't bring the subject up.

    My elder sister and brother-in-law (Daily Mail readers, not very interested in politics generally, both culturally very conservative) are both voting Remain. They've made their minds up very firmly and were very surprised that I was surprised. Their three children's choices are unknown to me.

    My younger sister and brother-in-law, a teacher and IT professional, are both probably voting Leave, though may yet change their minds. My sister was also very surprised that I was surprised at this. They had obviously thought about this a lot and discussed it a lot with their children (both also of voting age and both it seems from what she was saying Remain voters). Her view was that it would take about 10 years to see returns from leaving and there would be some hard years ahead, but that at present they thought that it was on balance worth leaving.

    My parents are keeping their cards very close to their chest. If I were guessing, I'd guess they're both going to vote Leave, though my mother in particular is a hard one to read on this.

    My only conclusion is that people aren't necessarily going to vote along stereotypical lines in the referendum.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    edited March 2016
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    NickPalmer said:

    NorfolkTilIDie said:



    I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

    I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

    But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.
    This is an example of how London (and some other large cities) are now very different from rural and suburban England. I doubt if any of those here insinuating that SK supports terrorism have votes in the Mayoral election.

    Who says he supports terrorism? I have never seen that claim made.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,751
    NickPalmer said:

    The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

    IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.

    Oh please Nick: don't take us for fools. It's more than "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff and you know it. It's him speaking with Cage at rallies. Cage are not the RSPCA. They are a dreadful organisation and for anyone claiming to be a serious politician to associate with it shows appalling judgment. I know that we have got used to lots of senior Labour people associating with terrorists and their friends in ways that would have been thought of as unimaginable and beyond the pale in the past, so much so that it almost seems banal.

    But it isn't. It shames your party.

  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited March 2016
    Yougov turnout 77%
    London real turnout 2012 38%

    40-59 age group - Goldsmith leads on certain to vote
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    david_herdson said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    david_herdson said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

    Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.
    Please not the 23rd of June.

    I just know my next stint as Guest Editor covers the EURef bar the last four days will be the least stressful stint ever.
    It is the obvious day though, isn't it?
    It is.

    Perhaps Sadiq Khan will follow my advice and remain an MP if he becomes Mayor.
    Surely noone can do the two full time jobs of being constituency MP and OH WAIT...
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    edited March 2016
    Cyclefree said:

    NickPalmer said:

    The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

    IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.

    Oh please Nick: don't take us for fools. It's more than "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff and you know it. It's him speaking with Cage at rallies. Cage are not the RSPCA. They are a dreadful organisation and for anyone claiming to be a serious politician to associate with it shows appalling judgment. I know that we have got used to lots of senior Labour people associating with terrorists and their friends in ways that would have been thought of as unimaginable and beyond the pale in the past, so much so that it almost seems banal.

    But it isn't. It shames your party.

    Save your breath. Corbyn is an ace guy in his book and he is terrorist sympathiser, unlike Khan, who just appears to have a blind spot to associating with people who are.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Trump had to divert to Charlotte, NC because of fog.
    Still making his way to Hickory, with Chris Christie apparently...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc6FMmjomJI
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Only 38%?

    Blimey.
    chestnut said:

    Yougov turnout 77%
    London real turnout 2012 38%

    40-59 age group - Goldsmith leads on certain to vote

  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,455
    Anyone know when we get the GOP outcome for Guam?
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    RodCrosby said:

    Trump had to divert to Charlotte, NC because of fog

    How valkyrie-like of him.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    On certain to vote - 47% of the sample (which exceeds highest achieved turnout) Khan and Goldsmith are neck and neck.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,727
    AlastairMeeks said:

    My referendum anecdotes (from a family wedding). No, I didn't bring the subject up.

    My elder sister and brother-in-law (Daily Mail readers, not very interested in politics generally, both culturally very conservative) are both voting Remain. They've made their minds up very firmly and were very surprised that I was surprised. Their three children's choices are unknown to me.

    My younger sister and brother-in-law, a teacher and IT professional, are both probably voting Leave, though may yet change their minds. My sister was also very surprised that I was surprised at this. They had obviously thought about this a lot and discussed it a lot with their children (both also of voting age and both it seems from what she was saying Remain voters). Her view was that it would take about 10 years to see returns from leaving and there would be some hard years ahead, but that at present they thought that it was on balance worth leaving.

    My parents are keeping their cards very close to their chest. If I were guessing, I'd guess they're both going to vote Leave, though my mother in particular is a hard one to read on this.

    My only conclusion is that people aren't necessarily going to vote along stereotypical lines in the referendum.

    My Mother came out as a Leaver this weekend. She says there's too much Eastern European/Roma migrants to the country (Yes I'm aware of the irony of her complaining about immigration)

    That said, she said her concern about voting for Leave is once the immigrants have gone, UKIP and the loons will start going after Muslims/and other minorities.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    chestnut said:

    On certain to vote - 47% of the sample (which exceeds highest achieved turnout) Khan and Goldsmith are neck and neck.

    Great analysis, as usual...
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    My good lady is veering towards Remain because of property ownership elsewhere in the EU - nothing even remotely connected to trade, sovereignty, business ramifications etc.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Tories pushing up towards 30% among pensioners in Scotland, and have close to a quarter of the ABC1's.

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/hsxl98o8mw/TimesResults_160310_ScotlandVI&Trackers.pdf
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,751
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Cyclefree said:

    NickPalmer said:

    The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

    IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.

    Oh please Nick: don't take us for fools. It's more than "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff and you know it. It's him speaking with Cage at rallies. Cage are not the RSPCA. They are a dreadful organisation and for anyone claiming to be a serious politician to associate with it shows appalling judgment. I know that we have got used to lots of senior Labour people associating with terrorists and their friends in ways that would have been thought of as unimaginable and beyond the pale in the past, so much so that it almost seems banal.

    But it isn't. It shames your party.

    Save your breath. Corbyn is an ace guy in his book and he is terrorist sympathiser, unlike Khan, who just appears to have a blind spot to associating with people who are.
    I'm not going to save my breath. I'm going to keep on calling people out on this because this is important.

    There is not a vast difference between sympathising and turning a blind eye.

    If you turn a blind eye to evil then you enable evil to triumph. Though Mr E Burke put it rather more eloquently than me.

    The abandonment by the Left (or a significant part of it) of its moral compass in order to flirt with and embrace people and groups who, were they not a bit dark-skinned and/or claiming to be religious, would in other times be described by the Left as fascists is an utter disgrace. Without a moral compass Labour is nothing. Nothing worthwhile, IMO, anyway.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @MrHarryCole: Movement: Understand statement is coming re Vicki Kirby. Seems she was never formally booted out, just blocked from being candidate in 2014

    @PolhomeEditor: BREAKING: Labour say they will only take action against Vicky Kirby "If new evidence comes to light".
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Tissue_Price said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    david_herdson said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

    Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.
    Please not the 23rd of June.

    I just know my next stint as Guest Editor covers the EURef bar the last four days will be the least stressful stint ever.
    I thought the EC guidance warned against holding other elections on the same day as referendums? Though I don't know if that applies to by-elections.
    The EC guidance also warned against holding the referendum within 6 months of the commencement of the enabling act (1st Feb 2016), so the referendum should not be held before 1st August 2016, clearly the government isn't listening that closely to the EC.
  • LondonBobLondonBob Posts: 467
    RodCrosby said:

    Sam Wang: Trump needs to lose Ohio, to secure the nomination...
    http://prospect.org/article/losing-ohio-improves-trump’s-chances-win-nomination

    The limits of quantitative modelling. Using bad data in the two polls he is feeding in and generalising across very different regions and states.

    Trump would like nothing better than to be one on one with Cruz. Cruz will win the delegate poor plains and Rocky mountain states, Trump will sweep up all those delegates in the Far West, South West and North East.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    The certain to vote and older demographics stats are much more credible than the headlines.
    chestnut said:

    Tories pushing up towards 30% among pensioners in Scotland, and have close to a quarter of the ABC1's.

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/hsxl98o8mw/TimesResults_160310_ScotlandVI&Trackers.pdf

  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,455
    LondonBob said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Sam Wang: Trump needs to lose Ohio, to secure the nomination...
    http://prospect.org/article/losing-ohio-improves-trump’s-chances-win-nomination

    The limits of quantitative modelling. Using bad data in the two polls he is feeding in and generalising across very different regions and states.

    Trump would like nothing better than to be one on one with Cruz. Cruz will win the delegate poor plains and Rocky mountain states, Trump will sweep up all those delegates in the Far West, South West and North East.
    I agree LondonBob. Also dividing the anti-Trump vote means (a) Trump is more likely to win but (b) he is less likely to get half of all delegates. Trump will want to prioritise (b), the risk of a stitch up is too great if he gets say 42% of delegates.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I simply replace the handwaving with BNP and it all becomes clear.

    No one would consider that acceptable from Tories.
    Cyclefree said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Cyclefree said:

    NickPalmer said:

    The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

    IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.

    Oh please Nick: don't take us for fools. It's more than "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff and you know it. It's him speaking with Cage at rallies. Cage are not the RSPCA. They are a dreadful organisation and for anyone claiming to be a serious politician to associate with it shows appalling judgment. I know that we have got used to lots of senior Labour people associating with terrorists and their friends in ways that would have been thought of as unimaginable and beyond the pale in the past, so much so that it almost seems banal.

    But it isn't. It shames your party.

    Save your breath. Corbyn is an ace guy in his book and he is terrorist sympathiser, unlike Khan, who just appears to have a blind spot to associating with people who are.
    I'm not going to save my breath. I'm going to keep on calling people out on this because this is important.

    There is not a vast difference between sympathising and turning a blind eye.

    If you turn a blind eye to evil then you enable evil to triumph. Though Mr E Burke put it rather more eloquently than me.

    The abandonment by the Left (or a significant part of it) of its moral compass in order to flirt with and embrace people and groups who, were they not a bit dark-skinned and/or claiming to be religious, would in other times be described by the Left as fascists is an utter disgrace. Without a moral compass Labour is nothing. Nothing worthwhile, IMO, anyway.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,487
    edited March 2016
    Cyclefree said:


    The abandonment by the Left (or a significant part of it) of its moral compass in order to flirt with and embrace people and groups who, were they not a bit dark-skinned and/or claiming to be religious, would in other times be described by the Left as fascists is an utter disgrace. Without a moral compass Labour is nothing. Nothing worthwhile, IMO, anyway.

    IMO, Labour certainly have a serious problem with this, in the way the Tories in the 80's used to turn a blind eye to fellow travelers who were racist or homophobic.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    She has to call more Jews big noses?
    Scott_P said:

    @MrHarryCole: Movement: Understand statement is coming re Vicki Kirby. Seems she was never formally booted out, just blocked from being candidate in 2014

    @PolhomeEditor: BREAKING: Labour say they will only take action against Vicky Kirby "If new evidence comes to light".

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Scott_P said:

    @ian_a_jones: Poll updates for @PA: in Scotland, we're now forecasting Labour to come third, behind the SNP & the Tories. (1/2) https://t.co/m8uxecdgAO

    Won't that be nice - the SNP government AND Official Opposition as one on tax and austerity
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025